Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Donald Dale Zamora

April 25, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
DONALD DALE ZAMORA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. 09F6117)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mauro , J.

P. v. Zamora CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Defendant Donald Dale Zamora was convicted of attempted kidnapping of a child under the age of 14, attempted kidnapping of a child for the purpose of committing a lewd and lascivious act, making criminal threats, indecent exposure, and annoying or molesting a child. There were also findings that he served a prior prison term and had a prior serious felony conviction. The trial court sentenced defendant to 24 years in prison.

On appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request to represent himself, (2) the trial court abused its discretion in ordering that he be shackled during trial, and (3) defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to sufficiently cross-examine and impeach the main witness against him.

We conclude:

(1) The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request for self-representation. Defendant was repeatedly disruptive and manifested an inability or unwillingness to comply with courtroom procedure.

(2) Defendant did not meet his burden to show that the evidence was inadequate to support a finding of manifest need for shackling. The available information indicates that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, and there is no evidence of prejudice.

(3) Defendant does not establish ineffective assistance of counsel. Defense counsel's tactical choices were not deficient.

We will affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

On August 25, 2009, 15-year-old D.R. was walking with his three-year-old sister J.R. in their apartment complex. D.R. saw defendant at the top of some stairs and saw his friend Kyler on the walkway in front of the apartments. D.R. had never seen defendant before.

As D.R. and J.R. went up the stairs to see Kyler, defendant blocked their way, yelling, "Do you want to get your ass whooped, little boy." D.R. was frightened, and turned and walked down the stairs with J.R. Defendant yelled after J.R., "Hey, pretty little girl. How old are you? What's your name?" D.R. looked back up at defendant and saw that his penis was exposed.

D.R. and J.R. walked across the parking lot to Kyler's apartment to tell Kyler's father about what happened, but he was not home. Then they walked back through the carport in the middle of the U-shaped complex to go to their apartment to tell their own parents. Defendant was sitting in a truck with the door open. He got out at some point and the next thing D.R. knew, defendant grabbed J.R. away from him. Defendant dragged J.R. toward his truck parked a few feet away. He got her into the truck and tried to shut the door, but D.R. hit defendant until he let J.R. go.

J.R. ran home crying and told her mother that D.R. was fighting a man. The man had grabbed J.R. and pushed her face down into his privates. J.R. was hysterical and clung to her mother. A group of people from the apartment complex held defendant in his truck until the police came. While defendant sat in the truck, his pants were undone and his penis was exposed.

Defendant denied seeing D.R. and J.R. on the stairs, denied speaking to J.R., denied exposing himself, and denied grabbing J.R. and attempting to molest her. Defendant stated, "[T]here is no way that I would molest a child. I grew up in a wealthy family. We had 54 babies." Defendant maintained that when he rented the apartment the day before the incident, D.R. tried to get him to buy drugs for D.R. and tried to charge him $10 to see the apartment. That same night, defendant had to go to the hospital due to severe constipation. Two nurses became angry when he passed gas in front of them and they called the police. The police abused him and then dropped him off in a vacant lot.

While walking home, defendant soiled his pants. He washed them out in his apartment but had nothing to wear. He stuck his head out the window and asked if anyone had clothes for him. A black woman gave him some unisex pants. Defendant testified, "[T]hat got me dressed to go -- and to go make this deal that I had on a million dollar project. I'm not kidding."

Defendant was working on his truck when he was surrounded by a crowd of people. Someone thought he had harmed the three-year-old girl. He was not scared because he had worked at three prisons with hardcore inmates, and had been to 28 countries on four continents over a two-year period.

Corporal Eric Niver of the Redding Police Department responded to the scene. Defendant's zipper was undone and he had on female underwear. Niver testified that defendant said the underwear belonged to his girlfriend, but defendant yelled out in court that this was a lie. Niver stated that defendant admitted speaking to the three-year-old girl and telling her she was pretty. Defendant did not tell Niver about going to the hospital, being beaten by police in a vacant lot, soiling his clothes, and getting clothes from a black woman. Defendant did not tell Niver about D.R.'s alleged ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.